Updating the 1979 Michigan ORV Plan

Dr. Chuck NelsonDept. Community,

Agriculture, Recreation and

Resource StudiesMI State University

MI’s First and Only ORV Plan Mandated by PA 319 of 1975 Approved by NRC in 1978 Part of the 1979 State Comprehensive

Outdoor Recreation Plan Key Initiatives

• Sought to separate ORV activity and other uses where conflict occurred

• ORV riding allowed on• Designated ORV trails, routes and areas• Forest road system open to ORVs• Develop designated riding opportunities in S. MI

• Protect the resources of the state from pollution or impairment

Since 1979: Changes in Technology, Recreation, Facilities and Regulations

1980 DNR promulgates administrative rules • Close state forest land to ORV use except for forest

roads and designated trails, routes and areas• Need 1,500 miles designated trail on the ground

DNR unsuccessful in creating S MI ORV areas 1989 statewide ORV study

• ORV has risen dramatically from the 1976 study• ATVs are the most common ORV• No major apportionment of gasoline sales tax money

for ORVs as the PA 319 of 1975 recommended 1990 DNR finishes 1,500 miles/rules effective ORV Trail Improvement Fund authorized 1991 NRC approves the system of ORV trails,

routes, areas

Since 1979: Changes in Technology, Recreation, Facilities and Regulations

1991 Public Act 17 • On Lower Peninsula state forest lands

• Forest roads, trails, routes and areas closed unless posted open

• Huron-Manistee National Forests adopted same rules• UP state forests stay open for use on forest roads and

designated trails/areas/routes unless posted closed• Task force of citizens/DNR critical in decision

• 1992 ORV season rules in effect for first time• ORV Trail Improvement Fund distribution authorized

Forest Recreation 2000 (approved 1995)• Strategic Plan for MI state forest recreation system

• Goal is a high quality forest recreation program as part of a working, multiple use state forest system

• Campgrounds, trails (motorized and non-motorized) and areas with forest recreation as the key value

Since 1979: Changes in Technology, Recreation, Facilities and Regulations

Public Act 58 of 1995 Use annual licensing to provide ORV program

funding• Residents and non-residents pay• Eliminates MI registration, now use titling• Re-Create ORV Trail Improvement Fund, modify

distribution formula • Restricted fund with carry-over authority• Grants to governmental agencies, non-profits for:• > 50% revenues for trail, area, route construction,

maintenance, acquisition• >31.125% for trail, route and area enforcement• > 12.125% for ORV damage restoration on public lands• < 3.125% for administration

Since 1979: Changes in Technology, Recreation, Facilities and Regulations

1997 ORV Trail/Route Assessment System of 2,531 miles (not including MCCCT)

• 86% on MI state forest land• 14% on National forest land

DNR System condition (not including MCCCT)• Of 2,097 miles rated by DNR

• 61% good (trail/route in compliance with trail standards over 95% of trail mileage)

• 27% fair (trail/route in compliance with trail standards 75%-95% of trail mileage)

• 11% poor (trail/route in compliance with trail standards for less than 75% of trail mileage)

Since 1979: Changes in Technology, Recreation, Facilities and Regulations

1997 Trail Maintenance Costs/Reimbursement Rates Workshop with cooperators

• Out of pocket costs (gasoline, equipment, etc.)/mile• $29.04 ORV trails• $21.69 ORV routes

• If labor is considered a reimbursable cost/mile labor costs (@ $6/hour)

• $104.05 for ORV trails• $ 55.05 for ORV routes

DNR used the following rates• In 1998 Trails @ $45/mile, raised to $54 in 2002• In 1998 Routes @ $34/mile, raised to $40 in 2002

Since 1979: Changes in Technology, Recreation, Facilities and Regulations

1998 Public Act 418 Forest Recreation Act• Mandates DNR to “develop, operate, maintain and

promote an integrated system that provides opportunities for hunting, fishing, camping, hiking, snowmobiling, ORV use,…w/in each state forest”

2000 ORV licensee use and user study First study to use ORV license info

• Key trends 1975-2000• ORV use has shifted northward• Proportional and absolute use of the designated

system has increased• Trail system has been created, grown, matured

2000 State-wide ORV Use and User Study Continued

• Key 2000 findings• 57% licenses ATV, 23% MC, 19% SUV

• 21% from UP, 21% from NLP, 58% from SLP• 4.2 million ORV days per year

• 44% private land ride, 31% public land ride, 25% hunt/ice fish

• In average ORV household 2/3 family members ride• 71% 12-15 aged kids operate ORV, 1/3 riders

completed ORV safety course• 57% 10-11 aged kids operate ORV, 1/6 riders

completed ORV safety course • 54% of licensees used the designated trail system

• 46% did not use the designated system• 29% of licensees used a designated ORV area • Key changes desired in response to open-end ques.

• More riding opportunities, better signage, legal on road shoulders, reduce fee for non-trail users

2000-2002 AuSable Pilot Project Value of more law enforcement and better

signage to improve ORV rule compliance• Clare, Gladwin, Roscommon and Ogemaw Cos. • Improved signage appreciated by riders• Area with improved signage and additional

enforcement had a 30% decline in ORV violations per contact by DNR enforcement personnel

• Signage had relatively few apparent vandalism problems

• Strong support for linking MCCCT loops with designated ORV trail/route connectors

An Updated Plan for Tomorrow Key issues for updated plan

Meet legal mandates Provide adequate riding opportunity Minimize social conflict Maintain environmental integrity Maximize rider safety Make most efficient use of ORV funds Recent new wrinkle – New FS rules

• “Closed unless posted open” on all NF • Not just the Huron-Manistee

Forest certification

Who will be involved?

• ORV Trails Advisory Board• Plan involvement is an important charge

• ORV riders• Significant input through existing statewide surveys• Public information meetings, written comments

• ORV Trail Improvement Fund grant sponsors• Trail maintenance grant sponsors• Law enforcement community• Environmental restoration interests

• County road commissions• ORV organizations and dealers• Trail managing agencies• General public

• Public information meetings, written comments• DNR

• 8/26 Supervisors, 10/14 NLP, 10/15 UP

Timeline March 2004 – May 2005

Assemble and review background data • License trends• Grant programs

• Trail maintenance• Law enforcement• Environmental restoration

• ORV user surveys • 1976, 1989, 2000, 2002

Listen to interested stakeholders• Stakeholder workshops

• 9/16 Restoration grant recipients• 9/21 Trail maintenance grant recipients• 10/11 Oscoda Co. local gov./citizens

• Public information meetings• 10/12 Lansing• 10/13 Grayling• 10/14 Marquette

Maintenance and Restoration Grant Workshop Input

Maintenance• Support for improved signage

• Yellow backers from AuSable Pilot Project• Sign plan removing discretion for sponsors

• Significant concern about liability associated with maintenance activities

• Growing trail use = more trail maintenance• Costs higher than reimbursement for most• Support gas sales tax money to ORV program

Restoration• Engineering requirements are challenging• Need better ID of ORV damage sites off trails• Need more restoration interests involved

Public Information Meetings• S. Michigan (Lansing 10/12)

• Attendance about 100• Three distinct user groups represented

• Motorcycles, ATV, full size truck/dune buggy• Non-trail oriented users not well represented

• Want separate trails to meet differing user needs• More trails in total• Parallel trails,“play” areas for large trucks • Many want NLP forest roads open to MC/ATV• Stated need for trail restoration, relocation

• Want direct access from trails to goods/services• Support using gas sales tax $ from ORV for ORV• Support hands on & written youth ORV safety ed.

Grayling Public Info Meeting• Attendance about 85 on 10/13

• Again three distinct groups plus 56” width ATV • Gator, Mule, etc. • Non-trail oriented users not well represented

• Want separate trails to meet differing user needs• More trails in total• Parallel trails,“play” areas for large trucks • Many want NLP forest roads open to MC/ATV• Stated need for trail restoration, relocation

• Want direct access from trails to goods/services• Support using gas sales tax $ from ORV for ORV• Support hands on & written youth ORV safety ed

Marquette (UP) Public Meet• Attendance 135 (10/14)

• Different character than previous meetings• Three ORV vehicle types represented• Also had vocal non-ORV riders concerned

about trespass, property and environmental damage, cross-country use & beach riding

• Also had hunt/fish/pick non-trail riders • Keep state/national forest roads open to ORV• Support county road shoulders open to ORV• ORV riders seen as major component of tourism

• Want more designated trails for tourists• Support for ORV education focused on written to

reach more youth, work through sheriffs• Want sign compatibility with snowmobile prog.

Timeline March 2004 – May 2005

Design and administer new surveys • Trail managers nationwide and in MI

• How do others plan/manage ORV program• MI trail managers update MI trail condition info

• County road commissioners• Willingness/concern with providing ORV

opportunity

• Law enforcement community• Experiences with ORV enforcement grant

program and interest in education program

• ORV organizations/dealers• Concerns, needs

Timeline March 2004 – May 2005 Reports on all surveys (December 2004) Draft plan to DNR (January 2004) Public draft plan presentation to MI ORV

Trails Advisory Board Draft plan out for public review (January –

March 2005) Revisions based on input (April 2005) Final plan May 2005